Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

qwen.ai

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 400 posts

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#301

Post by esperent »

aerhardt wrote: post #184
embedding-shape wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huh yeah, that's truly a unique trait these Chinese companies don't share with companies in other countries.

No it is not, but they had a unique positioning around open-source and the parent commenter means that they are losing it.

Again, a trait they share with companies in other countries. It's the obvious business model: get known by releasing impressive open models, then pivot to closed for even more impressive models.

That's going to be the path for every new company from every country, I assume. They are not releasing open models out of the goodness of their hearts. They are for-profit companies, they don't have hearts, they just have balance sheets.

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#302

Post by esperent »

wg0 wrote: post #61
atilimcetin wrote: post #33

Nowadays, I'm working on a realtime path tracer where you need proper understanding of microfacet reflection models, PDFs, (multiple) importance sampling, ReSTIR, etc.. Saying that mine is a somewhat specific use case. And I use Claude, Gemini, GLM, Qwen to double check my math, my code and to get practical information to make my path tracer more efficient. Claude and Gemini failed me more than a couple of times with…

I have said similar things about someone experiencing similar things while writing some OpenGL code (some raytracing etc) that these models have very little understanding and aren't good at anything beyond basic CRUD web apps. In my own experience, even with web app of medium scale (think Odoo kind of ERP), they are next to useless in understanding and modling domain correctly with very detailed written specs fed in…

To be fair, I've had the extreme misfortune of working on Odoo code and I can understand why an LLM would struggle.

Yearly breaking changes but impossible to know what version any example code you find is related to (except that if you're on the latest version, it's definitely not for your version), closed and locked down forum (after several months of being a paying customer, I couldn't even post a reply, let alone ask a question), weird split between open and closed, weird OWL frontend framework that seems to be a bad clone of an old React version, etc. etc. Painful all around. I would call this kind of codebase pre-LLM slop, accreted over many years of bad engineering decisions.

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#303

Post by Barrin92 »

elorant wrote: post #80
ninjahawk1 wrote: post #29

The way to develop in this space seems to be to give away free stuff, get your name out there, then make everything proprietary. I hope they still continue releasing open weights. The day no one releases open weights is a sad day for humanity. Normal people won’t own their own compute if that ever happens.

This is obviously a strategic move at a national level. Keep publishing competing free models to erode the moat western companies could have with their proprietary models. As long as the narrative serves China there will be no turn to proprietary models.

>This is obviously a strategic move at a national level.

no it isn't. That's the kind of thing people say who've never worked in the Chinese software ecosystem. It's how the Chinese internet has worked for 20+ years. The Chinese market is so large and competition is so rabid that every company basically throws as much free stuff at consumers as they can to gain users. Entrepreneurs don't think about "grand strategic moves at the national level" while they flip through their copies of the Art of War and Confucius lol

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#304

Post by enochthered »

deaux wrote: post #298
LoganDark wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The value in Claude Code is its harness. I've tried the desktop app and found it was absolutely terrible in comparison. Like, the very nature of it being a separate codebase is already enough to completely throw off its performance compared to the CLI. Nuts.

> The value in Claude Code is its harness If this was the case then Anthropic would be in a very bad spot. It's not, which is why people got so mad about being forced to use it rather than better third party harnesses. Pi is better than CC as a harness in almost every respect.

Anthropic limiting Claude subs to Claude code is what pushed me away in the end because I wanted to keep using Pi.

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#305

Post by greyskull »

daemonologist wrote: post #296
greyskull wrote: post #274

I've been using Claude Code regularly at work for several months, and I successfully used it for a small personal project (a website) not long ago. Last weekend, I explored self-hosting for the first time. Does anyone have a similar experience of having thoroughly used CC/Codex/whatever and also have an analogous self-hosted setup that they're somewhat happy with? I'm struggling a bit. I have 32GB of DDR5 (seems inad…

First of all nothing you can run locally, on that machine anyways, is going to compare with Opus. (Or even recent Sonnet tbh - some small models benchmark better but fall off a bit in the real world.) This will get you close to like ~Sonnet 4 though: Grab a recent win-vulkan-x64 build of llama.cpp here: https://github.com/ggml-org/llama.cpp/releases - llama.cpp is the engine used by Ollama and common wisdom is to jus…

Thank you for all this, I'll give it a shot. Out of curiosity, are there any resources that sort of spell this out already? i.e., not requiring a comment like this to navigate.

> nothing you can run locally, on that machine anyways, is going to compare with Opus

Definitely not expecting that. Just wanted to find a setup that individuals were content with using a coding harness and a model that is usable locally.

What does your setup look like? Model, harness, etc.

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#306

Post by arcanemachiner »

koen_hendriks wrote: post #250
dymk wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You give it command line access in a VM...

You mean a VM like the one that contains a 0day that can escape the sandbox that gets found every year at pwn2own?

"Seatbelts don't save the life of everyone who gets into an accident, so why bother wearing one?"

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#307

Post by ycui1986 »

jxmesth wrote: post #196
ecocentrik wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When was the last time you used Qwen models? Their 3.5 and 3.6 models are excellent with tool calling.

I gave it a try a few weeks ago tbh, I'll give it another shot tho. I mainly use their Web chats since that's easier to use and previously, qwen, deepseek, kimi, all were unable to output proper docx files or use skills.

outputting docx files does not have much to do with model capability. it is about whether tool calling has be configured .

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#309

Post by zackify »

bink-lynch wrote: post #283
alex7o wrote: post #71

Ok I find it funny that people compare models and are like, opus 4.7 is SOTA and is much better etc, but I have used glm 5.1 (I assume this comes form them training on both opus and codex) for things opus couldn't do and have seen it make better code, haven't tried the qwen max series but I have seen the local 122b model do smarter more correct things based on docs than opus so yes benchmarks are one thing but realit…

I have been using GLM-5.1 with pi.dev through Ollama Cloud for my personal projects and I am very happy with this setup. I use pi.dev with Claude Sonnet/Opus 4.6 at work. Claude Code is great but the latest update has me compacting so much more frequently I could not stand it. I don't miss MCP tool calling when I am using pi.dev; it uses APIs just fine. I actually think GML-5.1 builds better websites than Claude Opus…

I'm using pi the same as you. However, I have an MCP I need to use and the popular extension for that support works fine for me.

Really liking pi and glm 5.1!

Re: Qwen3.6-Max-Preview: Smarter, Sharper, Still Evolving

#310

Post by zackify »

jadbox wrote: post #295
bink-lynch wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been using GLM-5.1 with pi.dev through Ollama Cloud for my personal projects and I am very happy with this setup. I use pi.dev with Claude Sonnet/Opus 4.6 at work. Claude Code is great but the latest update has me compacting so much more frequently I could not stand it. I don't miss MCP tool calling when I am using pi.dev; it uses APIs just fine. I actually think GML-5.1 builds better websites than Claude Opus…

Why use ollama cloud versus like Openrouter?

Recently it had great limits but this month I'm trying open router directly.
Post reply on HN